ZINE ABOUT Feminist Pedagogies: Discussing Intersectionality, Accessibility and Feminist Labour Jemina Lindholm & Aapo Raudaskoski lindholm.jemina@gmail.com; aapo.raudaskoski@gmail.com www.queercripfeminist.net 30.4.2020 / Helsinki, Finland We want to publicly acknowledge that the State of Finland is founded on the lands of two peoples, the Sámi people and the Finnish people, and to pay our respect to the Sámi people as the indigenous inhabitants of the North. (This is a tentative example of how to acknowledge the colonization of Sápmi in Finland. If you have comments, don’t hesitate to contact us. More information about the Sámi people and decolonization: https://faktalavvu.net)
Content i.
Introduction This section includes a description of a challenging moment at (feminist) work. Content notes: General mentions of precarious economical situations
ii.
Aapo+Jemina This section includes a description of us as a pedagogical duo and the premise of our (feminist) work. Content notes: General mentions of precarious economical situations
iii.
Queer+Crip This section include a description of our pedagogical approaches and (feminist) work in the museum context where we intersect queer and crip perspectives. Content notes: General mentions of precarious economical situations, general mentions of oppressive structures
iv.
Accessibility+Inclusivity This section includes a little glossary on disability and reworking the meanings and practices of accessibility and inclusivity. Content notes: General mentions of oppressive ableist structures and discrimination
v.
Feminist Pedagogy+Leadership This section includes a description of anti-oppressive educational principles that can be useful also in feminist leadership. Content notes: General mentions of oppressive structures, mentions of internalized oppression
vi.
We did not do this alone. This section includes a list of references.
vii.
We will not continue this alone. This section includes an invitation and link to a discussion forum where we two will be on call on Wednesday 13th of May from 12.00pm to 1.15pm, and occasionally also after that. You can comment, ask questions or give feedback before, during and after reading this material. Link to the platform: https://padlet.com/lindholmjemina/feminist_pedagogies
2
i. Introduction Last time we held a lecture together, for a group that we didn’t know beforehand, we noticed that our presence and the topic of our talk was somehow provocative and caused some emotional resistance. This is of course our own interpretation, as direct feedback in the classroom or after the lecture was never given to us. Our topic for the three-hour lecture was “feminist pedagogy”, and it was held in a Finnish university. We had received an email invitation to give a lecture a little shy of two months before, asking if we would be interested. They let us know that we would have a three-hour slot for our contribution in the program and that we would also be paid for that three-hours (including the planning of the lecture). We answered them saying “yes”. The main lecturer in charge of the whole course program sent us another email containing a draft schedule of the course that included the names of the other speakers and a list of the topics that they were going to discuss. They let us know that there would be around 30 people on the course, both bachelor and master students. While we were trying to figure out our approach, the context of our lecture, the wishes and needs of the group and the amount of work suitable in relation to the fee that we would be getting out of this based on this information and email communication, we realized this would be an impossible task. The situation in itself and the whole structure of the course and more broadly the structure of the studies were anything but feminist. How, then, to discuss feminist pedagogy in an environment that doesn’t support it? We decided to take this as a starting point and write our contribution for the lecture based on this issue. We decided to take on a collegial approach as we thought that these kind of situations would also be part of the every day of the people that we were giving the lecture to, as they were also studying to become teachers. We decided to make it a discussion-based lecture as we thought that it would be nice to hear what the students think about these issues and their future profession. At the beginning of the lecture we introduced ourselves and our practice. This invited in critical feedback, which was encouraged and lead to an important discussion. We then continued to the discussion workshop part of the day. We introduced two words “accessibility” and “accountability” and their definitions as a starting point for the discussions. We also wrote a couple questions to support the discussion that would happen in small groups. The discussions didn’t flow. There was no enthusiasm. People seemed confused and uninterested. The atmosphere didn’t get any better after the discussion or towards the end of the lecture. The main lecturer, who had remained mostly silent during the whole time, said “thank you” and we left the room, while the rest of the group went on with their course program. We didn’t receive any feedback or comments or questions, as we already mentioned. We went to sit somewhere to reflect as we usually do everytime we teach or guide or whatever together. We both felt bad, as if we had failed. This was an amazing opportunity to give and take up space for feminist issues and approaches, and we were the
3
(privileged) ones invited to teach and we blew it. Both of us had noticed or felt the resistance, assumed defeatedness, anger and annoyance of the group during our lecture, but we just couldn’t do anything about it. It was something during these three hours that had gone wrong and it felt hard to grasp it. We have been discussing this incident many times afterwards. The most recent time being today, the 25th of April 2020. The lecture was held six months ago. During our subsequent discussions we have been thinking the following: 1. 2.
3.
It is provocative and mutually frustrating to discuss feminism in situations and environments that are not feminist. It can be irritating to hear about feminist approaches when… a. You are not given examples or practical advice in how to apply them in your own every day work. b. You are in a context where they seem too idealistic, unrealistic and even utopian. c. You feel like you know these things already and think “who does this person think they are?” d. The situation happens in a framework and pedagogical setting that doesn’t encourage participation or dismantling existing hierarchies within teaching. e. You feel like the person who is speaking is speaking from a privileged position. In this case meaning that we two working in a museum field do not have to deal with the everyday hardships and workload present in schools. f. It feels conspicuous and ungenuine, all talk and no action. All of these are our assumptions. This lecture and the discussions that followed describe well the feelings, situations, contradictions and contextual intersectionalities (privileges and oppression), that are constantly present and always related to feminist labour, pedagogy and leadership. This also describes our work as a pedagogical duo, how and from which perspectives we approach it. In this material we want to address these issues more in depth, offer possible thoughts, tools and resources to support feminist labour and provide a platform for discussing these problematics. Let’s see how it goes this time.
4
ii. Aapo+Jemina First, we are a pedagogical duo who works with and within culture and art institutions, especially museums, and study and develop feminist pedagogy and queer and crip pedagogies. Our work includes guided tours, diverse public engagement, teaching, workshops and consultation. The premise of our work as well as this material is that contemporary feminist discussions are thoroughly pedagogical in nature, whereas this aspect has not been addressed properly. As feminism pursues societal change, it inherently requires an actual possibility of changing one’s actions, environments, social relations and patterns of thought — and this, in short, is what unlearning oppression. As feminism is an innately critical movement, feminism is about learning. We believe that thoughts, attitudes and discourses are concrete actions, and that focusing on the learning process within feminist movement is very much hands-on and tangible work that needs further attention. Our views are partly based on the new materialist ontology where matter and meaning are entangled and co-constitute each other (Barad, 2007; see other references in section vi). Therefore, the approach to pedagogy is transformative and underlines the importance of unlearning. This material was made for Feminist Leadership Platform in spring 2020 as a course material about the role of feminist pedagogies in feminist leadership.
5
iii. Queer+Crip In this section we unpack our approach to collaboration, a central structure of our work and theme for our understanding of feminist pedagogy. Hopefully this helps understand our transformative pedagogical approach better. We always work together, almost without exception, for several reasons. This section contains thoughts on the following reasons: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Creating room for multiple perspectives Carving out the intersections of queer and crip as we know them Accommodating and validating each other’s queer and crip experiences in work life Providing freelance worker safety in a precarious and economically hostile society Dismantling the norms of capitalist or spectacle individuality 1) From a feminist point of view, a multitude of perspectives is often very welcome*. We bring our own experience expertises to the table (chronic illness, gender diversity), as well as our other positions as marginalized, and often also privileged people. The idea is to create a structure where “expertise” is not singular, which it in normative pedagogical contexts often is (such as in lectures, guided tours or classrooms), but open to interpretations and other possibilities. In critical pedagogy, it is encouraged to disclose one’s own perspectives to the extent that participants have the possibility to critically assess their position in regard to the speaker. This, however, does not mean that “coming out” is by any means obligatory. The point of making room for multiple perspectives is to enable marginal and underrepresented perspectives to equally enter the discussion and common spaces that are constantly dominated by normative perspectives. *) Well, not always: as we acknowledge the importance of keeping learning situations open to everyone, we do not welcome or approve any kind of oppressive perspectives. 2) The focus on queer and crip is an opportunity to unveil the intersection of these realities and identities as they occur to us. We often describe the histories of the terms, as they are both pejorative words that have been reappropriated by queer and crip activists to celebrate everything anti-heteronormative (queer) and reclaim the humanity of everyone regardless of ability or health (crip). Both queer and crip fields are diverse, critical and in constant movement, and they are not consensus-driven, which makes them hard to define. They often share a wonderful subversive attitude towards oppressive norms. Although we use queer and crip perspectives to challenge normative interpretations of artworks, learning, societal phenomena or exhibitions, they are not mere tools but actual lived experiences that intersect with other statuses that people have. We acknowledge that we are in many ways privileged within our own communities and compared to countless people who struggle with various additional types of oppression, while at the same time, we hope that our work will open possibilities also for others. 3) Equally important part of our dense collaboration is the fact that it provides a way of accommodating and validating each other’s queer and crip experiences in our work communities. Our identities may be easily hidden from normative gazes, which can be privilege but also creates specific struggles. As we know each other very well, we can provide support in situations where our experience expertise is being questioned based on our appearance. This, of course, is strictly a temporary coping mechanism as this kind of safety should without question always be provided by the institution or the organization where marginalized experts are invited.
6
4) A labour-based approach on the theme of collaboration is another central point in working together. As freelancers working in economically precarious situation and society that drives people to give their individual cultural contribution either for free or for extremely low wages, working together often feels like a radical solution, even if it is simple and nothing new. Our principle has been that we refuse to work alone, and in the light of our work, it has sometimes been even surprisingly easy to justify. As a pair, we can share the emotions and pressures of the working environments and give emotional, professional and even financial support for each other. This basically enables us to work with queer and crip issues as queer and crip persons, as such practices and structures are not a regular integral part of many institutional budgets or organizations. When institutions fail to accommodate queer and crip needs, we can try to accommodate each other. 5) Working together in the field of arts and culture, refusing to work alone can also dismantle the common norms and expectations that organizations, audiences and participants have of culture work, that unfortunately often drive commodification and individualism. For example, the work of a museum educator or guide contains a normative structure where “the guide” holds the important information and pours it over “the audience”. This kind of situation doesn’t encourage social negotiation, but if the social negotiation is already present in the dynamics of “two guides”, the stage is more open to start with. It is easier to resist the urge to respond to expectations when you are not alone.
7
iv. Accessibility+Inclusivity Disability – A Little Glossary During our work with queer and crip perspectives in the museums we have witnessed that “queer” as a word seems to be more familiar to many than the word “crip”. This depicts the current situation also more broadly as disability as a phenomenon is still largely unknown and a silenced issue. So we thought it might be useful to discuss disability a little more before continuing to accessibility and inclusivity. We did this in a form of a glossary to support information retrieval for further (un)learning. History of Disability: The history of disability is as diverse as any, but it might be useful to think about a couple of things that are related to this history. This is now done mainly in the Global North and Finnish context. This is an important point as there is no one history of disability and the contexts of disability vary in relation to location, culture, time and so forth. There is a very scarce amount of written history about disability, especially the kind that would have been told from the perspective of the people with disabilities. The majority of this written history has been written in the context of medical science and health care. Disability has been often and long been defined and existed in relation to the ideals of human that have as well varied from being “god-like”, “normal” or “productive”. In this sense disability has always been regarded as “the other”. This otherness has resulted in systematic and intrusive discrimination and oppression that still continues today — including reduced and harmful stereotypes that shape and affect our understandings of what it means to be mad, sick or crip still in this moment in time, and that have contributed to stealing agency from the individuals with disabilities and to the pervasive ableism of our current societies. One of the most cross-cutting coincidence of this oppression and discrimination is the isolation that people with disabilities and chronic illnesses have lived and still live with in various forms and for various reasons. These all have contributed to the silence that surrounds disability. This becomes quite evident in a fact the UN treaty for human rights of people with mental disabilities was ratified in Finland in as late as 2016. Accessibility and inclusivity then are also strategies to tie the gap induced by the silence and isolation. To be absolutely clear: despite the oppressive history, people with disabilities and chronic illnesses have not remained silent and have lived amazing and beautiful lives. Disability Rights Movement: Along with the civil rights movement of the 60’s and 70’s came disability activism that called for equal opportunities and rights for the people with disability. Disability Studies: As a generative byproduct of Disability Rights Movement became disability studies, which is an interdisciplinary field of research that studies disability and the phenomena related to it without medical perspective. This field of study seeks actively to better the conditions of people with disabilities. Differing from the texts produced in the context of medical science, disability studies is often done by people with disabilities.
8
Alternative and Parallel Fields of Research: Mad Studies (studies the lived experiences, history, cultures, and politics about people who may identify as mad, mentally ill or neurodiverse), Deaf Studies (studies the lived experiences, history, cultures, and politics about people who may identify as deaf), Crip Theory (seeks to combine personal, cultural and political spheres of disability). Cultural Models of Disability: Moral Model (disability is located in a sin and can only be addressed or treated with religion), Medical Model (disability is located in the individual and can only be treated and addressed in medical terms), Social Model (disability is located in the society, infrastructure and environment, fails to take into account the actual body with disability), Affirmative Model (promotes positive identities associated with disability, fails to take into account the multitude of emotions the disability entails), Cultural Model of Disability (disability is cultural and people with disability should be regarded as a cultural minority). Disability Justice: A more recent movement and a framework initiated by trans and queer people of color that is intersectional and acknowledges that fact that ableism enables other forms of oppression. Re-examines established (white) notions of disabilities, human rights and social justice movements. Crip: Crip is a short for an English word ‘cripple’. The term was formerly used as a pejorative for people with disabilities or sickness. Along with the disability activism of the 60’s and 70’s the term was re-owned and repurposed by the people with disabilities and used in a provocative and even ironic manner. The contemporary use of the term bases on inclusivity and intersectionality. Meaning that it includes all disabilities varying from physical impairments to chronic illnesses and regards intersecting identities. In other words the term has been appropriated to reinforce positive meanings related to disability and self-determination plays a huge role in it. The origin and use of the term can slightly be compared to the similar development in the use of the term queer. There is no Finnish translation for the term. Ableism: Systemic political, institutional, or societal structure, attitude or action (discrimination) which regards disability and illness as something undesirable, wrong and “other.” Internalized ableism takes place when a person with disability or illness internalizes these ideas and starts to regard themselves in this way. The mechanism is similar to other forms of oppressions such as racism, cis-heterosexism, classism and so forth.
9
Words and Meanings Now we can move towards accessibility and inclusivity as these words are strongly linked to disability. We also encourage to a broad understanding of these terms as they are applicable in other fields of intersectional feminism as well. Here we have selected dictionary definitions of these words at hand: What is accessibility? “The quality of being reached or entered.” “The quality of being easy to obtain or use.” “The quality of being easily understood or appreciated.” “The quality of being easily reached, entered, or used by people who have a disability.” What is inclusivity? “The practice or policy of including people who might otherwise be excluded or marginalized, such as those who have physical or mental disabilities and members of minority groups.” According to these definitions there is someone or something already established that or who is granting the access or including in people in an already existing structure. To include in or give access to what? There is a misperception or misunderstanding these words and their meanings. Or more precisely in our opinion they demand more detailed defining. These misperceptions or misunderstandings often lead to for example tokenism, commodification or other forms of false diversity. These also lead to situations where the thing that we are making accessible is always regarded as something to be worth accessing in the first place. And this is something we cannot fully know if it hasn’t been accessed by some groups of people that have not had the possibility to affect it.
10
Think about it like an Online Document. When you share a document you can decide who you give access to and on what levels. It usually works in according to this hierarchy: → view → comment → edit This is not accessibility or inclusivity. Accessibility and inclusivity require this to be reversed. There is no “you” creating the document or deciding who gets access and on what levels. Everybody should be able to edit, so that it is even possible to comment or view. → edit → view+comment Accessibility and inclusivity should always entail in themselves the possibility to edit, to dismantle and actually change things. And this requires accommodation. Here we had a go on defining these words and their meanings again: “New” accessibility? ”The quality of being reached or entered.” + the quality of being worth reaching or entering and being able to change to accommodate and to dismantle. ”The quality of being easy to obtain or use.” + the quality of being worth obtaining or using and being able to change to accommodate and to dismantle. ”The quality of being easily understood or appreciated.” + the quality of being worth understanding or appreciating and being able to change to accommodate and to dismantle. ”The quality of being easily reached, entered, or used by people who have a disability.” + the quality of being worth reaching, entering, or using by people with disability and being able to be changed by and to accommodate people with disabilities and to dismantle ableism. “New” inclusivity? ”The practice or policy of including people who might otherwise be excluded or marginalized, such as those who have physical or mental disabilities and members of minority groups.” +The practice or policy of building, establishing or initiating something by or with people who might otherwise be excluded or marginalized, such as those who have physical or mental disabilities and members of minority groups, for them and everyone else. What would be your definitions?
11
12
Words and Practice What does this mean Practice? Granting access to a space that has not been affected and shaped by accessibility and its consequences, itself requires accountability. When organizing a gathering or an event: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Please add accessibility and inclusivity planning to your project schedule. Please write out your values and aims of your operation. This allows for transparency. Please ask what people need and wish for. Not only from the audience, but from the contributors as well. Please listen to their wishes and needs, terms and conditions. Think about your own wishes and needs, terms and conditions as well. Please reserve time and resources for making the required changes. Think about this while applying for funding. Please create spaces that are physically accessible and can be modified during the event or gathering. Everything is not possible, but what is possible is to create space for negotiation. This is not enough, but this is we we can start. Concrete examples: Safer spaces guidelines, accessibility checklists and guidelines, access riders, feedback forms, diverse ways of participation, recruitment policies, gender neutral bathrooms and other facilities. The words, meanings and practices discussed above are not fixed. There are multiple other definitions, understandings and uses that are vital in different contexts, and they change constantly. Accountability and accommodation are also huge words that would deserve their own full presentations. Regardless of all the work and changes, spaces and situations might not be accessible for everyone due to e.g. contradicting access needs or chronic pain. This is not pessimistic, but a strategy for thinking about accessibility and inclusivity. In accessible or inclusive event production and in all action we should aim at developing, planning and implementing structures that allow us to acknowledge and continue making space for people who will never attend or be there, not only in the physical sphere, but in our daily thinking. This means that we refuse to justify inaccessibility by thinking or stating that “They would not have come anyway�. This might be helpful in making space within our thinking and in an attempt to change accessibility and inclusivity from being mere stacks of knowledge, add-ons in operation or gestures towards equality into being continuous processes, attitudes, methods, strategies and lived realities.
13
v. Feminist Pedagogy+Leadership A skillful leader is also a skillful feminist. To help understand what kind of feminist pedagogy one needs in various situations, we have found the following typology useful. North-American educationist Kevin Kumashiro divides anti-oppressive education into four types in their book “Troubling Education: Queer Activism and Anti-Oppressive Pedagogy” (2002): 1. 2. 3. 4.
Education (or leadership) for the Other Education (or leadership) about the Other Education (or leadership) that is critical of privileging and othering Education (or leadership) that changes students and society While Kumashiro writes specifically about classroom politics, these approaches can be applied in other feminist pedagogical contexts as well. Here we introduce them as they would be relevant for feminist leadership. Each approach may not be sufficient alone but needs to work as part of a comprehensive anti-oppressive movement. 1) “Education/Leadership for the Other” comprises practices that aim to improve the experiences of the marginalized people in the organization. This includes safer space guidelines for audiences and employees alike, accessible spaces and resources and emphasis on marginalized perspectives. The approach should be considered insufficient alone, as it may see the marginalized people as “the problem” without changing the oppressive norms of the society or communities that perpetuate exclusion and hostility. It may also prove difficult to analyze the needs each oppressed groups and individuals without specific structures that already abolish the Normal-Other dichotomy. 2) “Education/Leadership about the Other” focuses on educating people about the experiences and perspectives of the marginalized instead of carrying on as if there were no problem of oppression in the society. This approach may spark empathy towards the othered people but the problem of patronizing is obvious, and another risk is to force marginalized people into being educators without their consent or proper compensation for the work. All in all, this approach is also based on the modernist ideal of the “perfect and complete knowledge”, which in our view is not compatible with the diversity of social reality. 3) “Education/Leadership that is critical of privileging and othering” exposes the inequalities by focusing on privileges and structures that create privileges to some but marginalize others. This requires learning about oppression and structural inequalities, unlearning oppressive habits and analyzing one’s own complicity in oppressive structures, and learning critical thinking and emotional labour so that all of the above would even be possible. The advantage of this approach is that it brings educators or leaders to a more active role of changing society and taking responsibility, and enhances the skills of critical reflection for everyone to disrupt oppressive behaviours in themselves and others. However, there remains “the problem of the universal patriarchy”, namely the fact that oppression affects different groups and individuals differently across varied contexts. There is also an underlying positivist thought that the mere information about oppression would cause people to change their ways, which is not the case. Learning about one’s own complicity to oppression often sparks dissonance and discomfort (“the crisis of unlearning”), and may result in defensive backlash, moral regression or nihilism.
14
4) “Education/Leadership that changes students and society” is the fourth pedagogical approach, and it sees oppression as a discursive practice that perpetuates inequality in (often implicit) meanings. Oppressive meanings are “cited” across social contexts and continue to hurt marginalized people on a daily basis. Therefore the goal is to change the course of that process and stop the continuum of discursive oppression. Here, oppression is understood thoroughly as a context-sensitive issue and it varies from situation to situation, from group to group, and from individual to individual. In this approach, it may not always even be fruitful to forbid the hurtful discourses but rather overturn them through reappropriation, counter-performance, creativity and wit. A central part of this approach is also the focused efforts to facilitate the “crisis of unlearning” that disrupting oppressive patterns may produce, and the central role of the educator or leader is to help everyone through the difficult emotions and discomfort. This requires abandoning conventional hierarchies and admitting that no one individual has all the necessary information or all the right values to change society. The platform is kept open as well as constantly and actively remodeled through shared motivation and communication. These four approaches above are theoretical examples, and often good feminist practice needs to handle them all in appropriate situations and with people in different positions. As an educator as well as a leader it is important to understand one’s own position in as many ways as possible. This helps to understand the limits of one’s own expertise and social status and, at the same time, provide possibilities to create room for others who need it — one person is always not enough as we have different strengths and weaknesses. What other kind of anti-oppressive approaches there might be?
15
Emotions and Emotional Labour – A Little Glossary In our pedagogical work, we have realized time and again how central the facilitation, communication and handling of emotions is almost to any goal of any community. Here we share our thoughts on what we find as culminating emotions in feminist work and what the direction with these emotions could be, pedagogically speaking. This small glossary only scratches the surface of the politics of emotions, and from our personal/ professional point of view, but the discussion about their role is gaining ground in feminism and hopefully continuing to move forward. Anger and being “pissed off” Anger is a complex emotion that can be caused by reactions to various happenings and situations. In our work, being “pissed off” (which we understand is a form of anger) plays an important role of our own motivation and can sometimes also be felt from others in the situations. Just like many other emotions, anger contains an initiative to change something, so it can be useful in feminist work against oppressive structures (“moral outrage”). It has its dark side too, as anger is not far away from bitterness, vindictive fury or hate. That’s why it’s important to allow appropriate space for anger in oneself and others and avoid public shaming or judging, as anger is not easy to manage alone. Anger is also an understandable reaction to the shortcomings of an oppressive society. This sometimes manifests as frustration when talking about social justice issues in a situation/place/structure/institution that is not thoroughly committed to feminism, and as an educator or a leader it is important to share power and platform in those situations and acknowledge that frustration. Resistance and Crisis Similar to anger, resistance as a clear reaction to something is important to analyze as a pedagogue or leader. If people in a given community resist change, the reason should be explored and discussed in an understanding atmosphere that gives room for reflexivity, criticism, trial, error and acceptance — and plenty of time. These are necessary conditions for any learning and change. Resistance can be caused by fear, anger, sense of justice, misinformation or discomfort/nuisance. Avoiding defensive settings is crucial and this can be attained by creating morally just, transparent and responsible communities. Shame and Failure Shame is an extremely powerful political factor in society. Sadly often used as a silencing mechanism, shame contains an impulse to hide and is therefore counterproductive to community building. In feminist context, shame is often present in internalized oppression where we have lived through unfair and unjust social situations and retained oppressive language and meanings that hurt others as well as ourselves. Another kind of shame is the fear of being publicly shamed (or even “cancelled”) about one’s contribution to feminism and social justice. This kind of discourse can be harmful to the community and prevents many important critical discussions from taking place. Failure is an inevitable part of feminist work in a society that has so many oppressive structures and traditions, and for marginalized people failure can also be one of the few ways of existing in that society. To be clear, avoiding public shaming does not mean avoiding accountability and responsibility, which should be based on constructive criticism. Joy and Pride Joy in times of crisis is important community care: how to rejoice while simultaneously remaining critical and aware of the flaws? Joy is not synonymous with toxic positivity that renounces negative emotions. Political counterpower of Shame is Pride, which in (queer) activism since 1960’s has been impactful. Pride activists are the ones who ex-
16
tremely boldly reclaim marginalized and oppressed identities and behaviours and make them livable and celebratory. Pride is a radical movement, which is why it should not be confused into capitalist pseudo-acts of pink-washing and commodification. The responsibility of institutions is to acknowledge the pain, loss of freedom, health and life that it has taken for activists of various kinds to take our societies to this point where Pride flags can be flown with relatively low risk of violent aggression or public shaming. Filtering and regulating emotions Regulating emotions is a huge part of feminist work and still often little discussed. In community work, regulating skills are crucial as they accept the (difficult) emotions of others that are actually present as existing parts of the situation at hand. Stepping aside for a moment, giving platform, space and time for the emotions of others is important for validation and building trust and safety. However, no-one should be expected to regulate their emotions at all times. There is also a real need for spaces to express nonregulated emotions, where marginalized people shouldn’t be afraid of losing their jobs, getting publicly shamed or ridiculed when they express how they feel facing oppression. Creating these spaces is what a responsible educator or leader does. Reward and Honor In institutional framework, unhelpful systems of rewarding are often used to fuel “social responsibility”. As institutions compete for cultural legitimacy and economical balance, it can be hard to stick to actual feminist work which can at times be very much unrewarding. Sometimes this leads to politics of spectacle where showing outcomes in hopes of short term gratification is favored at the expense of the things that should actually be changed, however detrimental they would be to the neoliberalist ecstacy. Another form of this spectacle is celebrityism, which the act of putting certain people inside the social justice movement on the pedestal and publicly lining up with them (until they do or say something one doesn’t agree with). This kind of culture does not enable us to fully take part in the complex conversations of feminist politics as a whole. What tools do we have, then, for creating room for complex emotions? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Discussing expectations beforehand to give everyone time to orientate to the shared situation and to avoid misunderstandings that can be derailing. Providing a way to give anonymous feedback on several occasions, not only after the situation but also before and during. E.g. online feedback forms that are accessible all the time or post-it notes and pens that are collected anonymously. Providing multiple ways of participation that don’t require verbalising or performing in front of others. E.g. written contributions and silent moments. Avoiding “toxic positivity” or evaluating emotions by their market value. E.g. Refusing to ease the tension by “wrapping the situation up.” Rescheduling discussions for processing emotions at a later time that suits for all participants so that it is possible for everyone to prepare.
17
Thinking About the Other – A Little Exercise At the end of this dense package of feminist pedagogies, we propose a small exercise in becoming more aware of our constant social presumptions and their effects to the hierarchy and structure of our communities. This is one of many creative ways to “make room inside ourselves� so that we can learn, unlearn, change ourselves and the society. Imagine if in every event or gathering there would be a chair that was dedicated for the most marginalized and vulnerable that would stay empty. How would our perception of the event, moment and gathering change? Would this help us not to forget and to be more empathetic? Would this help us change our reality?
18
vi. We did not do this alone Accessibility: Definition of Accessibility by Lexico. https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/accessibility Ahmed, Sara (2004). The Cultural Politics of Emotion. Edinburgh University Press. Barad, Karen (2007). Meeting The Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics And The Entanglement of Matter And Meaning. London: Duke University Press. Cripping Community: New Meanings of Disability and Community – Eliza Chandler. (2012). Retrieved from http://nomorepotlucks.org/site/cripping-communitynew-meanings-of-disability-and-community/. Inclusivity: Definition of Inclusivity by Lexico. https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/inclusivity Kafer, Alison (2013). Feminist, queer, crip. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Keywords for Disability Studies. https://keywords.nyupress.org/disability-studies/ Koivisto, Mikko O. (2019). The Art of Egress: Madness, Horror, and the Pedagogy of Depsychiatrization. Aalto ARTS Books. Kumashiro, Kevin (2002). Troubling Education: Queer Activism and Anti-Oppressive Pedagogy. Routledge. hooks, bell (1994). Teaching to transgress: education as the practice of freedom. London: Routledge. hooks, bell (2003). Teaching community: a pedagogy of hope. New York: Routledge. Laukkanen, Anu et al. (2018). Feministisen pedagogiikan ABC: Opas ohjaajille ja opettajille. Vastapaino. Lindholm, Jemina. (2019). nothing special – Zine-making as an Approach to (Critical) Disability (Studies) and as Feminist Art (Pedagogical) Practice. (Master of Arts Thesis). Aalto University. Mingus, Mia. Leaving Evidence. https://leavingevidence.wordpress.com/ McRuer, R. (2006). Crip theory: cultural signs of queerness and disability. New York: New York University Press. Nussbaum, Martha (2016). Anger and Forgiveness: Resentment, Generosity, Justice. New York, N.Y.: Oxford University Press Puar, Jasbir (2012). “I Would Rather Be A Cyborg Than A Goddess: Becoming-intersectional in Assemblage Theory.” In PhiloSOPHIA 2.1: 49-66. Piepzna-Samarasinha, Leah Lakshmi. (2018). Care Work: Dreaming Disability Justice. Arsenal Pulp Press. Raudaskoski, Aapo (2019). Queering The Way: Queer Theory in Finnish Art Education. (Master of Arts Thesis.) Aalto University. Thom, Kai Cheng (2019). I Hope We Choose Love: A Trans Girl’s Notes From The End of The World. Vancouver: Arsenal Pulp Press. Vehmas, Simo. (2005). Vammaisuus: johdatus historiaan, teoriaan ja etiikkaan. Gaudeamus. Wynn, Natalie. 2016—. ContraPoints YouTube channel. https://youtube.com/contrapoints
19
vii. We will not continue this alone We hope this zine works as an entry point and a surface for reflecting upon and further examining our operation in the fields of art and culture. As the texts in this document are from our own perspective and filtered through our own experiences and positions, we welcome you to take part in a way that you see fit on the Padlet-platform created specifically to discuss the contents of this zine and thoughts that it provokes. We as authors are present online, answer questions and take part in the discussion on Wednesday 13th of May from 12pm to 1.15pm, and after this occasionally. You can freely add new posts and comment on threads by others. Link to the platform: https://padlet.com/lindholmjemina/feminist_pedagogies Guidelines for Conversation: 1. On this channel we will all commit to the ethical guidelines of #StopHatredNow 2020 that can be found here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P0fYLKNd3uaYJVPbJ7lo128HWjGJpFu/view 2. Please mark any possible content notes at the beginning of your post. 3. You can make your post in whatever language you prefer. Jemina can discuss in Finnish (suomeksi), English and Swedish (på svenska). Aapo can discuss in Finnish (suomeksi), English, Swedish (på svenska) and French (en français).
20